Consensus; noun, “to build a plan of action acceptable by all.” (Source 1). Consensus sounds remarkable on paper, but putting the plan into action is a complete different story much like lower taxes, free college, and raising minimum wage. Consensus may be acceptable in some situations but consensus all the time is just irrational.
To begin with, consensus would not work for everything. For example the public, or the counsel, may not even be versed in the issue they are forming a consensus for or it may even be a discussion pointless to discuss. Jesse VandeLaar, in his letter to the editor, makes a compelling point, in brief, he states that having a supreme figure, such as an administrator, should be making decisions simply because of their
…show more content…
Parent Mary Anne Dunlap in her letter to the editor declares,”A plan that has taken into consideration the opinions and interests of all the members- and survived extensive debate- is a plan that will stand the test of time.” While the plan may have survived extensive debate, that does not supply a justification whether or not it is appropriate for it to even be up for consensus at all, much less that the plan does not compromise the beliefs of the citizens on its behalf. uniqueness. Source two define consensus as, “when a group of people reach a general agreement.” Although the council does have a say in everything and all the ideas get meshed together, creativeness and having different views is not a sin. Consensus may work in some predicaments but insisting it works in all is preposterous.
When all is said and done, consensus is not the most effective strategy for decision making, it suppresses creativity, is rarely suitable, and compromises morals and values. In order to be successful, coming up with a resolution should be focused on the whites and blacks rather than the greys. Some things are better kept on paper like consensus